About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
WHUT (Howard University Television) 5
CSPAN 4
CSPAN2 4
CNNW 3
MSNBC 3
MSNBCW 3
CNN 2
KNTV (NBC) 2
KQED (PBS) 2
WETA 2
WRC (NBC) 2
KRCB (PBS) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 38
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)
. it is for these reasons that i believe he is the wrong person to lead the pentagon at this perilous and consequential time. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, senator inhofe. we have two former chairmen of this committee with us to introduce senator hagel. no senator has had two dearer friends or better mentor is that -- mentors than i have had with senators nunn and warner. i want to welcome them back to this committee. i don't have to tell them that they are among dear, dear friends. it is a real treat to welcome you back to the committee. i will call on you, senator nunn, first. i will call you alphabetically. i have no better way to do it. sam? [laughter] sam, welcome back. >> first, for the record, seniority and age are two different things. senator levin, ranking member inhofe, i am honored to join my friend john warner in presenting chuck hagel to the committee and recommending that chuck be confirmed as our secretary of defense. i think it is worth noting that 68 years ago this month, john warner and listed in the u.s. -- enlisted in the u.s. navy to fight in world war ii. that was
. we will be live from pentagon in a minute. >>> and falling from space, wow, pretty cool, at a rate of more than 843 miles per hour, that's how fast dare devil felix baumgartner fell when he jumped from space. the official speed has been released. even faster now than those record keepers thought at first. pretty cool stuff. >>> one of our top stories today at cnn, a secret american drone base somewhere in saudi arabia, now this is according, these are reports from two major newspapers today, saying that this u.s. launches these drone attacks against al qaeda targets from that particular base. i want to bring in two folks here at the pentagon chris lawrence also michael holmes from cnn international. chris, it's not a total surprise that this was there in saudi arabia, but certainly it was not something that they officially wanted to reveal. why are they doing it now? >> that's the big question, suzanne, why did this come out? we reported two years ago from our sources u.s. officials were telling us the cia was building an airstrip in the a arabian peninsula. it was hinted it would
to start with a washington battle on full display this week when the president's pick to head the pentagon, former republican senator chuck hagel, came under fire from members of his own party during a very contentious confirmation hearing. >> name one person in your opinion who's intimidated by the israeli lobby in the united states senate. >> are we right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> senator hagel, please answer the question i asked. today, do you think unilateral sanctions would be a bad idea? >> all this raising questions about how effective chuck hagel will be if confirmed as secretary of defense. earlier this weekend, i sat down for a rare joint interview with the top military leadership the outgoing secretary f defense leon panetta and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff general martin dempsey. >>> secretary panetta, welcome back to "meet the press." general dempsey, welcome. let me start with the man that is poised to take your place. he underwent on thursday a pretty tough round of questioning. he seemed to struggle with a lot of the answers. of cou
of the events of the events in benghazi. there were a series of meetings in the pentagon for expanding the department of defense's response as well as to prepare for the potential outbreak of further violence throughout the region. during these meetings, secretary panetta authorized a number of deployments. i hope that secretary panetta and the chairman will provide the committee with detail on the circumstances that led them to these decisions. since september, there's been a great deal of focus on the supporting role that the marine corps guards played -- play in many u.s. diplomatic missions abroad. the marine corps did not have an lament in again-- in benghazi. the committee will be closely monitoring the use of these marines. our fiscal year 2013 national defense authorization act that requires the secretary of defense to conduct an assessment of the mission of the marine security guard program, whether it should be expanded and to report to congress on the results of this review. more immediately, the provision requires the secretary to develop a plan to increase the number of ma
other americans. the pentagon never received the request from the state academy for security, and did not have the resources to get support on the ground in time to thwart the attackers. leon panetta is stepping down. this hearing is four hours and 15 minutes. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, everybody. today the committee welcomes secretary of defense, leon panetta, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, general martin dempsey. to testify about the department of defense's response the deadly terrorist attack on the u.s. temporary mission facility in benghazi, libya, last year. and the findings of its internal review following that attack, including lessons learned from benghazi. we will be receiving testimony next tuesday morning on the impact of sequestration and/or a full-year continuing resolution on the department of defense witnesses. there will be department secretary of defense, the comp driller and the joint chiefs of staff. i hope today's hearing with inform the committee of any changes being made or proposed to the posture of u.s.
your perspective on the pentagon's role in securing our embassies? we just had a near suicide attack, if you will, suicide bomber, at an embassy in turkey just last week. what can be done more than what has been done now? >> the important things to do are first of all you've got to build up the host country capacity. in the end, these embassies do depend on host country, the details that provide security. so you've got to try to develop that. >> this shouldn't be more marines? >> no, no. let me get the rest of the part of it. you have to harden these embassies as much as possible. and third, we have been working with the ste department to determine whether additional marines ought to be assigned to that area. and in the end, the final alternative is our ability to respond in having our troops in a position where they can respond quickly. but i have to tell you, a lot of that still is dependent on whether intelligence tells us that we've got a big problem, and gives us enough warning so that we can get to the place to respond. >> did you have enough time to get there in time? >> no. >
the drop program should fall under the pentagon, not the cia. you can listen to rebroadcast on c-span radio today. richards in result -- richard is on the line. what do you think about the drone's strikes? >> it is very vast modern-day technology. there will always be people killed a matter what we do. we have to grow up and understand that. the aclu is the biggest group of nuts on the planet. thank you. host: edmond, oklahoma. caller: i would just like to say one thing. the aclu is on the front of maintaining our constitutional rights. you may not agree with some of , but iflenges, i don't things they overall doing a good job. as far as the drones, they're working in that uncovered. in pakistan. i live in oklahoma and it has been in the paper recently that we have drone's being used here. one of your previous caller said there was a bill. from what i understand, we already have them here. we have a republican governor right now is in violation is not transparent, taking orders from right wing not jobs back east. and she now has these drones at her disposal. host: we heard earlier from form
effect. the pentagon needs a seasoned leader to diplomat these cuts, cuts for which an overwhelmingly majority of republicans in congress voted. the so-called sequester, mr. president, was supported by 174 republicans in the house of representatives, 28 republicans here in the senate, 60% and 75% of the two republican bodies in this country. we have a balanced proposal to replace those across-the-board cuts for this year with smart spending reductions which must continue, a measure to close corporate tax loopholes and wasteful subsidies. and revenue from the wealthiest among us, americans making millions of dollars each year. it's critical that the republicans and democrats come together to find a balanced way to avert these drastic cuts. the consequence of the so-called sequester cuts are real not only for national defense but for millions of american families and businesses alike. three-quarters of a million jobs, 750,000 jobs, mr. president, are at stake. across the country tens of thousands of teachers, including thousands of workers with disabled children would be laid off. 70,00
, if it goes into effect it's going to stay into effect. it will result in loss of jobs. the pentagon, i think last week, said that they were going to lay off 46,000 temporary workers and furlough civilian workers for a day a week for 22 weeks. this is not without effect on real people. the people who want the sequester to go into effect for a while, republicans who say, we'll deal with it, they want to hear complaints from constituents. they want pressure to be put on lawmakers to get their act together. i don't flow if that will work. because it hasn't worked so far. that's the hope. >> so far. eventually perhaps washington will get back to doing it the way it's supposed to be done. the president calling for a temporary fix. thank you r joining us. gloria borger, back in washington. as i turn things over to suzanne malveaux in atlanta. i love the language the president use, modest reforms, that means cuts in social programs, he's willing to do that in exchange for modest tax reforms, he means increases. language always interesting. tell us what's coming ahead. >> appearing reasonable and he'
military activity is that nobody in the pentagon would have ordered military act ship without a specific order from the president. and the president wasn't around. rick: i want do ask you both, we have about a minute and a half left. another story came out of these hearings. that is the president himself, rick, himself opposed a plan that was supported by pretty much everybody else in his administration, to try to arm the rebels in syria. what do you make of that? >> you know i think it's remarkable that his team was really recommending that we needed to do something to support what was happening there and identify the opposition, the right opposition and then try to give them some sort of military support. and the president said no. i think this goes back to exactly who he is and what he believes the inate, positive, good of people. i think he doesn't understand, the president doesn't understand, this is a dangerous world and that we need to take sides to make sure that the right people are the ones who take hold in syria. it is the same thing that happened in egypt. really the same thi
,000 dead americans, the trade towers are taken out, the pentagon's been hit. if it hadn't been for the folks on 93 they'd have taken out the white house or the capitol on washington, d.c. worst attack in our history. worse than pearl harbor by far. and it was our job to make certain it didn't happen again. we were concerned for a couple of rps, partly because the expectation was there would be a follow on attack, nearly everybody believed it. but we also received intelligence that al qaeda was trying to get their hands on deadlier weapons. >> rose: do you regret nothing about the aftermath in terms of how we -- >> regarding 9/11? >> rose: everything that we did and that you were and the president were at the center of the response to 9/11. look back and say "we regret nothing"? >> that's my view. >> rose: none? >> correct. >> rose: you know this has been debated, too. >> sure. >> rose: were we prepared for the consequences after saddam was overthrown? >> well, that was the second proposition. you asked me about the aftermath of 9/11, the policies we put in place here. i would s
director for the aclu. coming up later, we will speak with daniel ellsberg from the pentagon papers and also jacob appelbaum, who just lost a case. he does not have the right, says a federal court, to know when the government is taking his twitter information or email information. next, the controversy in the boy scouts. will the boy scouts of america allow gay leaders, gay members? stay with us. ♪ [music break] >> this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with nermeen shaikh. >> the boy scouts of america board members opened a three-day meeting on monday in which they will consider lifting its controversial ban on openly gay members. the group's national executive board is expected to vote wednesday on the ban which was reaffirmed just last year. on monday group of current and former scouts -- and scout leaders -- rallied outside the boy scouts headquarters in dallas. among them was jennifer tyrrell, who was removed as a den leader of her son's pack in ohio because she is a lesbian. she described her experience last year while receiving
've seen two budget-related announcements coming out of the pentagon. one, i was looking up just now because i was trying to remember the numbers, and that is that the pentagon is beefing up its cybersecurity force, taking it from 900 to 4,000 and putting a few billion dollars into it. the other one that is apparently being beefed up in these times of budgetary constraints are the special forces. tom, would you just talk about that generally and then, fred, if you would talk about that not just in afghanistan, but in the broader battle and the nature of it, and then we'll come over to publish shah and the non-- membership shah and the nonexistent challenge that faces us in asia. [laughter] >> i'll try to be brief, dani. look, these new capabilities, you know, cyber operations or whatever you want to call them are certainly necessary and needed, and our ability to exploit, you know, the electromagnetic spectrum configured as the internet is, you know, pretty critical. but it's not qualitatively different from other forms of intelligence gathering or, you know, attempts to either by pr
will recommend a cut in pay, a pay cut for active military. cnn pentagon correspondent barbara starr broke the story. tell us more. >> reporter: carol, this is the ultimate many believe in washington budget politics, cnn has learned indeed secretary panetta is recommending what you might think of as an effective pay cut. let me give you two numbers here. this year, 2013, the pay raise for the active duty military force has been 1.7%. that's tied to complex employment calculation, to 1.7% this year panetta now will recommend only 1% pay raise for next year, 2014. several officials have confirmed this to me. they say it is due to what they call budget uncertainty in washington. this is going to put the ball squarely in congress's court as they contemplate sequestration, the budget cuts, everything we have been talking about for weeks now. will congress vote to cut effectively cut military pay while so many troops are still in combat? carol. >> it boggles the mind. it's not like our military troops are making a whole lot of money. since congress can't get its act together -- it's unbelievable
the defense cuts especially, forcing this kind of draconian cuts on the pentagon, republicans would never go for. >> he thought it was going to be this ideal situation where it would be, it would inflict so much pain on both sides that both sides would then come to the table and want to bargain. problem is that the president's always talking about the balanced approach to our fiscal situation and our problems, and the republicans said, okay, in the fiscal cliff deal we'll give you your tax increases. so he has the tax hikes, but there have been no spending cuts. so now the republicans who actually for the first time in the obama presidency have the stronger hand, now they should come in and say, okay, you keep arguing for a balanced approach. we gave you your tax hikes, where are the spending cuts? and make him answer to that. jon: and has been pointed out many time, the additional money, the revenue as they like to call it that was raised by the that tax hike immediately got spent by the congress when they received the sandy aid bill. >> that's right. all in one shot it's been evaporateed.
on that "washington post" article that came out recently. it did suggest that the pentagon is pushing a plan that we keep on about 8000 troops in afghanistan. i know that general austin, you weren't a part of the planning process thus far, but can you supported plan that would scheduled withdrawal of troops in advance? you know, we are looking at withdrawal of troops in afghanistan, and according to this article from about 8000 down to 1000 within a very short period of time. i have questions if we can even maintain our mission, let alone complete the mission. how can you make decisions on troop withdrawal when, as you stated previously, so much depends upon conditions on the ground, what the government is doing, what their abilities are up to that point. how would you approach a proposal like that? >> i certainly would first really work hard to make sure i fully understood what the leadership wanted to get done moving into the future. and i certainly, my advice as a commander on the ground or commander of central command, i would provide my advice based upon where i think the security forces are, a
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)